Exploring better alternatives to size metrics for explainable software defect prediction

IF 1.7 3区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Chenchen Chai, Guisheng Fan, Huiqun Yu, Zijie Huang, Jianshu Ding, Yao Guan
{"title":"Exploring better alternatives to size metrics for explainable software defect prediction","authors":"Chenchen Chai, Guisheng Fan, Huiqun Yu, Zijie Huang, Jianshu Ding, Yao Guan","doi":"10.1007/s11219-023-09656-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Delivering reliable software under the constraint of limited time and budget is a significant challenge. Recent progress in software defect prediction is helping developers to locate defect-prone code components and allocate quality assurance resources more efficiently. However, practitioners’ criticisms on defect predictors from academia are not practical since they rely heavily on size metrics such as lines of code (LOC), which over-abstracts technical details and provides limited insights for software maintenance. Thus, the performance of predictors may be overclaimed. In response, based on a state-of-the-art defect prediction model, we (1) exclude size metrics and evaluate the impact on performance, (2) include new features such as network dependency metrics, and (3) explore which ones are better alternatives to size metrics using explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) technique. We find that excluding size metrics decreases model performance by 1.99% and 0.66% on AUC-ROC in within- and cross-project prediction respectively. The results show that two involved network dependence metrics (i.e., Betweenness and pWeakC(out)) and four other code metrics (i.e., LCOM, AVG(CC), LCOM3, and CAM) could effectively preserve or improve the prediction performance, even if we exclude size metrics. In conclusion, we suggest discarding size metrics and involving the mentioned network dependency metrics for better performance and explainability.\n</p>","PeriodicalId":21827,"journal":{"name":"Software Quality Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Software Quality Journal","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-023-09656-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Delivering reliable software under the constraint of limited time and budget is a significant challenge. Recent progress in software defect prediction is helping developers to locate defect-prone code components and allocate quality assurance resources more efficiently. However, practitioners’ criticisms on defect predictors from academia are not practical since they rely heavily on size metrics such as lines of code (LOC), which over-abstracts technical details and provides limited insights for software maintenance. Thus, the performance of predictors may be overclaimed. In response, based on a state-of-the-art defect prediction model, we (1) exclude size metrics and evaluate the impact on performance, (2) include new features such as network dependency metrics, and (3) explore which ones are better alternatives to size metrics using explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) technique. We find that excluding size metrics decreases model performance by 1.99% and 0.66% on AUC-ROC in within- and cross-project prediction respectively. The results show that two involved network dependence metrics (i.e., Betweenness and pWeakC(out)) and four other code metrics (i.e., LCOM, AVG(CC), LCOM3, and CAM) could effectively preserve or improve the prediction performance, even if we exclude size metrics. In conclusion, we suggest discarding size metrics and involving the mentioned network dependency metrics for better performance and explainability.

Abstract Image

为可解释软件缺陷预测探索尺寸度量的更好替代方案
在有限的时间和预算限制下交付可靠的软件是一项重大挑战。软件缺陷预测领域的最新进展有助于开发人员找到容易出现缺陷的代码组件,并更有效地分配质量保证资源。然而,从业人员对学术界缺陷预测方法的批评并不切合实际,因为这些方法严重依赖代码行数(LOC)等规模指标,过度抽象了技术细节,对软件维护的启示有限。因此,预测器的性能可能会被夸大。为此,我们以最先进的缺陷预测模型为基础,(1) 排除了大小度量并评估了其对性能的影响,(2) 加入了网络依赖性度量等新特征,(3) 利用可解释人工智能(XAI)技术探索哪些特征可以更好地替代大小度量。我们发现,在项目内预测和跨项目预测中,排除规模指标会使模型的 AUC-ROC 性能分别降低 1.99% 和 0.66%。结果表明,即使排除了大小指标,两个涉及网络依赖性的指标(即 Betweenness 和 pWeakC(out))和其他四个代码指标(即 LCOM、AVG(CC)、LCOM3 和 CAM)也能有效地保持或提高预测性能。总之,我们建议摒弃大小度量,采用上述网络依赖性度量,以获得更好的性能和可解释性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Software Quality Journal
Software Quality Journal 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
26
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The aims of the Software Quality Journal are: (1) To promote awareness of the crucial role of quality management in the effective construction of the software systems developed, used, and/or maintained by organizations in pursuit of their business objectives. (2) To provide a forum of the exchange of experiences and information on software quality management and the methods, tools and products used to measure and achieve it. (3) To provide a vehicle for the publication of academic papers related to all aspects of software quality. The Journal addresses all aspects of software quality from both a practical and an academic viewpoint. It invites contributions from practitioners and academics, as well as national and international policy and standard making bodies, and sets out to be the definitive international reference source for such information. The Journal will accept research, technique, case study, survey and tutorial submissions that address quality-related issues including, but not limited to: internal and external quality standards, management of quality within organizations, technical aspects of quality, quality aspects for product vendors, software measurement and metrics, software testing and other quality assurance techniques, total quality management and cultural aspects. Other technical issues with regard to software quality, including: data management, formal methods, safety critical applications, and CASE.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信